Messages in this thread | | | From | KY Srinivasan <> | Subject | RE: Drivers: scsi: FLUSH timeout | Date | Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:35:53 +0000 |
| |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jack Wang [mailto:xjtuwjp@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 5:08 AM > To: KY Srinivasan > Cc: Greg KH; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; devel@linuxdriverproject.org; > ohering@suse.com; jbottomley@parallels.com; hch@infradead.org; linux- > scsi@vger.kernel.org; Mike Christie > Subject: Re: Drivers: scsi: FLUSH timeout > > On 09/21/2013 07:24 AM, KY Srinivasan wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org] > >> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2013 1:32 PM > >> To: KY Srinivasan > >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; devel@linuxdriverproject.org; > >> ohering@suse.com; jbottomley@parallels.com; hch@infradead.org; linux- > >> scsi@vger.kernel.org > >> Subject: Re: Drivers: scsi: FLUSH timeout > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:32:27PM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote: > >>> The SD_FLUSH_TIMEOUT value is currently hardcoded. > >> > >> Hardcoded where? Please, more context. > > > > This is defined in scsi/sd.h: > > > > #define SD_FLUSH_TIMEOUT (60 * HZ) > >> > >>> On our cloud, we sometimes hit this timeout. I was wondering if we > >>> could make this a module parameter. If this is acceptable, I can send > >>> you a patch for this. > >> > >> A module parameter don't make sense for a per-device value, does it? > > Currently, the 60 second timeout is applied across devices. Ideally, I want to be > > able to control the FLUSH TIMEOUT as we currently do I/O timeout. If this is > > acceptable, I can work on a patch for that as well. > > > > Regards, > > > > K. Y > >> > >> greg k-h > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > Hi, > > Back to 2010, Mike(cc-ed) try to add a flush time out interface, similar > to what you want here, no idea why it's just ignored? > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg45017.html
Thanks Jack. Mike, do you know what the concerns were as to why this patch was not accepted?
Regards,
K. Y
| |